This place in Texas is not a hospital or a real therapeutic environment subject to the normal oversight you would expect of a medical or psychological facility that treats children.

Everything about it is suspect at best, and there are known investigations into this facility related to child trafficking. This was stated on the record in Forsyth County if you want to see the transcript. Aside from that statement, when you hear teens and young adults reporting back about what they’ve been put through there and at other “deprogramming” and “reunification” camps, all doubt will be removed.

So why would judges, attorneys and custody experts in Georgia be so comfortable in taking children away from healthy parents and forcing them out of state to this place?

Why would Georgia divorce attorney Tera Reese Beisbier write to a New Jersey judge that her friend Judge Bagley would be willing to get on the phone about his recommendations for sending children to the Rachel House?

It is important that Georgia recognize why Dr. Drutman is used on this case and others involving damages to children, even though he doesn’t have the credentials to support his involvement. It is also important to note that he has been investigated for billing fraud by an insurance company, and that he has committed billing fraud according to visible records. But these select attorneys still pay him top dollar on sensitive cases, and certain judges accept his recommendations in spite of overwhelming evidence against his positions. Why is that?

Dr. Howard Drutman: why is it noteworthy that this is the “doctor” trusted by these judges? Let’s take a look. Reviews such as this one are telling:

“Doctor Drutman was unprofessional, biased, and writes his opinions in child custody to favor known proclivities of the court judges, not as an uninfluenced professional. He damages children’s lives by falsifying reports, skewing information and failing to follow established APA guidelines. His work is an embarrassment to the profession and he should be barred form child psychology evaluations.”

We can only imagine what their motives are, but we thought you might want to hear more specifics on why we were drawn to Forsyth County Superior Court to learn more about this case. A case involving a teen girl pleading for her freedom from abuse.

If you have been reading our posts here, you will recognize the patterns across several cases, from Fulton, to Cobb to Forsyth…around how select custody experts and attorneys ensure that evidence does not work in favor of children or support the parent the evidence is actually in favor of on these cases. *In some cases the evidence supports the father as the healthy/nurturing parent, but the custody experts are going against that evidence also; it is not that they are against women, or in favor of affluent fathers with status. Select experts just choose to do the wrong thing, as apparently that ensures the need for their ongoing services.

We are asking our leadership and authorities to pay close attention to what makes sense here – and to compare the law to the conduct of these professionals. Things do not match up, and it is way too easy to spin messaging and create glossy brochures that put a happy or normal face on top of the abuse that is being enabled and covered up using this and similar facilities. (Not all wrongdoing by professionals involves sending kids to these camps; they are just one method used to increase fees and to further destabilize children and nurturing parents.)

From kids who were subjected to therapy here – therapy that is less humane that what arrested criminals are allowed to have done to them:

“The Rachel Foundation is a scary organization. It’s taken every day of my life since to put myself back together in a way I see fit.’

The Hochs “told us that if we didn’t obey our dad and if we didn’t agree to act happy with him that we would never see our mom again,” testified Kelli Carr, now 17.

She said she and her sister weren’t allowed to eat until they agreed to say positive things about their father.

“How many days did you go without being fed?” the judge asked.

“Just the first two days, because then my sister and I just started . . . making things up.”

More:

The foundation falls through licensing cracks because it is not a hospital, group home or mental health facility — all of which are regulated by Texas. Professionals connected with the Rachel Foundation are licensed, but several have run afoul of regulators.

The former clinical director, California psychologist Randy Rand, is on five years’ administrative probation for “unprofessional conduct” in child custody cases in Orlando and California.

A former member of the foundation’s advisory board, J. Michael Bone of Orlando, lost his Florida mental health counselor’s license in 2007 for failing to act in the child’s best interest in a custody case.

A Texas psychologist who has worked with the Rachel Foundation was put on probation for failing to disclose a DUI arrest and submitting a custody report with “numerous inaccuracies.”

And a California psychologist who has been to the Rachel House several times to help the Hochs does not have permission to practice in Texas, state regulators say.

“There are scientific standards and practice standards for how to go about delivering therapy to children,” Silberg of the Leadership Council says, “and nothing I’ve seen from the Rachel House follows any known standards about the delivery of mental health care.”

Stranger, and more disturbing yet, is the fact that one of the pro-pedophile “leaders” in the US was instrumental in making Rachel House so well known:

A onetime Columbia University professor, Richard Gardner thought society is too harsh on adults who have sex with kids.

“What I am against is the excessively moralistic and punitive reaction that many members of our society have toward pedophiles . . . far beyond what I consider the gravity of the crime,” he wrote in 1991.

Gardner argued [about pedophilia] that it’s common in many cultures and that children might be less harmed by sex abuse than by the “trauma” of the legal process.

In 2013, in Georgia, there was a hearing that was a continuance of an “Emergency” hearing that had been scheduled for over a MONTH where a teen girl has been begging the Court for relief. Not because she was yelled at…because she was being tormented & cut off from the help she needed, to the point where she became desperate and even suicidal.

It was outrageous and worth revealing to the public because most of us believe that when children are in danger that the court would respond quickly and efficiently to help save a life. Too often that just isn’t the case. This is one of the reasons for sharing stories from across the country, and asking our leadership to work on changes that will better protect kids in these situations.

Is it really necessary to make a child wait like this after so many outcries for relief?

@MyAdvocateCentr reports that her affidavits made jaws drop and eyes become shiny with tears. Not one affidavit…several. These were filed in Forsyth County to ask Judge Bagley to please pay attention, to please give her the freedom to say “Stop.”

Back to Georgia:
The father decided to retaliate against the school counselor who has worked to give the teen relief from oppression and duress – so the father tried to have him fired. Is this community going to stand behind a courageous girl & the school counselor?

A bold attorney actually found visible evidence – the morning of the first part of this hearing – of the very comfortable relationship between the Judge and the father’s attorney. Seasoned professionals approached & thanked her for speaking out & revealing the truth. Of course, the Judge saw no reason to recuse…so maybe he believes he can rule properly on this evidence?

Update: Judge Bagley did, in fact, see reason to grant this girl’s request and restored balance to her life with both parents. He also prevented the father from sending her away to another “camp” that the father insisted she should attend since she was indicating she wanted more time with her mother.

Why send a child away, getting LESS time with her, just to keep her from having time with her mother? Whether it is this camp he mentioned or the previous one he used, why do that at all?

The father’s attorney actually put in writing that she not only recommends the Rachel House in Texas on cases like this one, but she also said this judge would help support another judge sending children there.